Turning 65 soon? Social Security retirement age rises to 67 for 1960-born Americans — major benefit changes coming in 2025 you can't ignore
Social Security retirement age 67 becomes the new standard starting in 2025, affecting millions of Americans born in 1960. This long-planned shift means full benefits now begin at age 67, not 65. If you're turning 65 next year, you'll need to wait longer—or settle for less. This article explains what this means, how early and delayed retirement options work, and what's next for Social Security's future. With over 4 million people hitting retirement age in 2025, this change is more than just numbers—it's about planning your future.
Social Security retirement age rises to 67 in 2025 for those born in 1960. Learn what this means for your benefits, when to claim, early retirement cuts, and how lawmakers plan to fix the Social Security trust fund.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Why is full retirement age 67 now the new number?
Born in 1955: FRA is 66 and 2 months
Born in 1956: FRA is 66 and 4 months
Born in 1957: FRA is 66 and 6 months
Born in 1958: FRA is 66 and 8 months
Born in 1959: FRA is 66 and 10 months
Born in 1960 or later: FRA is now 67
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Can you still take Social Security early at 62?
Who will qualify for full Social Security benefits in 2025?
If you were born 1959, your FRA is 66 and 10 months—so you'll hit it sometime in 2025.
If you were born 1960, your FRA is exactly 67, and that won't come until 2027.
Why is the change to retirement age 67 happening now?
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
'This isn't just a bureaucratic adjustment but a response to increasing life expectancies and the financial challenges facing Social Security.'
Will Social Security run out of money?
Republicans are pushing to raise the retirement age even higher, citing longer life expectancy.
The Republican Study Committee proposed in 2024 "modest adjustments to the retirement age for future retirees."
'This bill would protect Social Security and Medicare for generations by making the wealthiest Americans pay what they owe.'
What should Americans do now as retirement age increases?
Check your FRA based on your birth year. It matters more than ever.
Plan ahead—decide whether you'll retire early, wait until FRA, or hold off until 70.
Monitor legislation. Any changes in Congress could impact your future benefits.
Consider your life expectancy and financial health when choosing your claiming age.
FAQs:
Starting in 2025, Social Security full retirement age (FRA) will officially shift to 67 for Americans born in 1960, marking a big milestone that affects when millions can claim their full benefits. This change isn't new—but for those turning 65 next year, it's the moment it becomes very real.The retirement age increase is part of a long-planned update that started back in 1983. Lawmakers back then passed amendments to the Social Security Act to ensure the program could keep up with people living longer. But only now is the full impact being felt as the first group born in 1960 turns 65.If you were born in 1960, you'll hit age 65 in 2025—but you won't be able to collect full Social Security benefits until you turn 67. That's two full years later than the traditional retirement age of 65, which had been in place for decades.This adjustment has been phased in slowly. People born before 1955 still qualified for full benefits at age 66 or earlier. For example:This gradual increase was meant to help Social Security stay financially stable as more Americans live longer and retire later.Yes, you can start collecting Social Security benefits at 62, but there's a catch—your monthly payments will be permanently reduced.Let's say your full retirement benefit at 67 is $1,000. If you decide to start at 62, you'll only get $700 a month. That's a 30% cut—for life.However, waiting past your FRA can reward you. If you delay until age 70, you could receive $1,240 a month instead. That's a 24% increase for holding out three more years.It all comes down to your financial needs and how long you expect to live. But the options—and consequences—are clear.Not everyone turning 65 in 2025 will qualify for full Social Security benefits. Only those born before 1960 will hit their full retirement age that year. If you were born in 1960, you'll have to wait until 2027—when you turn 67—to claim your full monthly amount.This matters because retiring early means locking in a smaller benefit permanently, while waiting ensures you get your full entitlement.This timing isn't random. In 2025, about 4 million Americans are expected to turn 65, according to demographic trends. Experts call it the 'silver tsunami'—a wave of older adults heading into retirement all at once.Michael Ryan, a financial expert and founder of MichaelRyanMoney.com, told Newsweek:Put simply, the system needs to stretch its funds further than ever before. People are living longer, drawing benefits for more years, and contributing stress to a program that's already under pressure.The Social Security trust fund is facing a shortfall. According to a 2024 report from the Social Security Board of Trustees, the retirement fund could become insolvent by 2033 if nothing changes. That means starting in 2033, Social Security would only be able to pay 77% of scheduled benefits.Lawmakers are deeply divided on how to fix the problem:Meanwhile, Democrats have a different approach.Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Representative Brendan Boyle reintroduced the Social Security and Medicare Fair Share Act. Their plan would lift the cap on payroll taxes for earnings above $400,000. Right now, any income over $168,600 isn't taxed for Social Security.Boyle said in a press release:So far, there's no bipartisan agreement, but the need for reform is becoming urgent.If you're nearing retirement, the most important thing you can do is know your full retirement age and understand your options.Here are a few quick tips:With the Social Security full retirement age now at 67, it's essential to understand how this affects your timeline, monthly benefits, and long-term plans.A: It's 67 for anyone born in 1960.A: Yes, but your monthly benefit will be reduced permanently.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Iran says no sanctions relief in US nuclear proposal
Iran's parliament speaker said on Sunday that the latest US proposal for a nuclear deal does not include the lifting of sanctions, state media reported as negotiations appear to have hit a roadblock. The two foes have held five rounds of Omani-mediated talks since April, seeking to replace a landmark agreement between Tehran and world powers that set restrictions on Iran's nuclear activities in return for sanctions relief, before US President Donald Trump abandoned the accord during his first term in 2018. In a video aired on Iranian state TV, parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said that "the US plan does not even mention the lifting of sanctions". He called it a sign of dishonesty, accusing the Americans of seeking to impose a "unilateral" agreement that Tehran would not accept. "The delusional US president should know better and change his approach if he is really looking for a deal," Ghalibaf said. On May 31, after the fifth round of talks, Iran said it had received "elements" of a US proposal, with officials later taking issue with "ambiguities" in the draft text. The US and its Western allies have long accused the Islamic republic of seeking to acquire nuclear weapons, a charge Iran has consistently denied, insisting that its atomic programme was solely for peaceful purposes. Key issues in the negotiations have been the removal of biting economic sanctions and uranium enrichment. Tehran says it has the right to enrich uranium under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while the Trump administration has called any Iranian enrichment a "red line". Trump, who has revived his "maximum pressure" campaign of sanction on Iran since taking office in January, has repeatedly said it will not be allowed any uranium enrichment under a potential deal. On Tuesday, Iran's top negotiator, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, said the country "will not ask anyone for permission to continue enriching uranium". According to the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency , Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that enriches uranium up to 60 percent still short of the 90 percent threshold needed for a nuclear warhead. Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Wednesday rejected the latest US proposal and said enrichment was "key" to Iran's nuclear programme. The IAEA Board of Governors is scheduled to meet in Vienna later this month and discuss Iran's nuclear activities. pdm/ami
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
How hydrogen, the fuel of the future, got bogged down in the bayou
The chief executive of Air Products & Chemicals visited the Louisiana governor's mansion in 2021 to unveil the industrial-gases supplier's biggest-ever investment: a $4.5 billion facility that would make the fuel of the future by the Mississippi River. Seifi Ghasemi's plan was to produce hydrogen from natural gas, capture the carbon dioxide, pipe it through wildlife-rich wetland and sequester it below picturesque Lake Maurepas. Ghasemi had a grand vision. Beyond its regular uses in oil refining and ammonia for fertilizers, hydrogen would power buses, trucks, trains, ships, planes and steel mills after the plant opened in 2026, he predicted. Nearly five years after his visit, the project's price tag has swelled to $8 billion, the construction timeline has slipped and the company is still seeking customers. Ghasemi has been ousted as CEO, and his successor is reining in spending. The idea that low-carbon hydrogen could replace oil and gas in many applications was taking off when Ghasemi visited Baton Rouge, La., as politicians and executives were vowing to slash emissions. But sentiment has since soured. This fossil-fuel alternative remains stubbornly expensive, and governments in the U.S. and elsewhere have shied away from putting their weight behind it. The tax bill approved by House Republicans would cut off hydrogen production tax credits, part of an effort to undo many Biden-era climate programs and reduce funding for wind and solar power. President Trump, meanwhile, has cast himself as the savior of U.S. oil and gas. Companies that once looked like early movers—such as the steel producer ArcelorMittal and Airbus, the plane maker—have delayed plans to use hydrogen. 'The main challenge right now is finding buyers," said Martin Tengler, a BloombergNEF analyst who estimates that just 4% of the announced low-carbon hydrogen production capacity had secured funding as of 2024. Hydrogen hype isn't new. High oil prices spurred an earlier wave in the 1970s. But high costs and impracticality—hydrogen is explosive and can leak through gold—meant that the plans fizzled. When climate worries revived the dream, few dove in more eagerly than Ghasemi. Air Products stood out for starting projects before it had customers and embracing technical challenges that rivals handed off to experienced partners. 'If you don't take the risk, you always lose," he said in a 2017 interview. Today, most hydrogen is extracted from natural gas, a process that adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. There are two main alternative methods—and Air Products pursued both. The Louisiana plant intends to make blue hydrogen. It is produced the traditional way, but the carbon is captured and kept out of the atmosphere—forever, if possible. Green hydrogen is made by splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen using renewable electricity. Blue hydrogen is more controversial. Carbon-capture facilities often catch less pollution than hoped—Air Products says it will capture more than 95%—and using natural gas ties this ostensible climate solution to a source of emissions. The House tax bill would eliminate tax credits for hydrogen production, which would kill most green-hydrogen projects, Tengler expects, but not the carbon-capture credits that benefit blue-hydrogen producers. 'It was a feeding frenzy" of a wave of blue-hydrogen projects that were drawn to Louisiana by tax credits and rocks suitable for storing carbon dioxide, said Corinne Van Dalen, a lawyer at the nonprofit Earthjustice. Air Products' ventures, from the bayou to a mostly unbuilt megacity in the Middle East, track hydrogen's growing pains. At Neom, Saudi Arabia's under-construction desert metropolis, Air Products has an unusual double role in the largest green-hydrogen project being built. As well as being a shareholder, the company committed to buy the hydrogen from the plant in the form of ammonia, which is easier to export. That puts the company on the hook to find customers. Air Products has announced just one: TotalEnergies, which plans to use green hydrogen in European refineries. Eduardo Menezes, who became Air Products' chief executive in February, said he is talking to other potential buyers. Saudi Arabia has the abundant sunshine, wind, space and labor needed to make relatively low-cost green hydrogen, but 'it's still a premium product," Menezes said. The plant is on course to start production in 2027, but Air Products now plans to delay its investment in facilities in Europe designed to handle hydrogen from Neom. More than 2,000 miles away, uncertain demand is slowing down a plan to turn the Dutch port of Rotterdam into Europe's hydrogen hub. Three years ago, Air Products and the trading group Gunvor said they would build a terminal to import ammonia and convert it back into hydrogen. It was one of several planned at the port, which also set aside space for green-hydrogen factories. Most of those projects, including Air Products', still await investors' go-ahead. A hydrogen pipeline network has been delayed. Shell is building a green-hydrogen factory, but BP recently pulled out of a similar effort, according to a spokesman for a former partner, HyCC. BP has been scaling back its low-carbon spending. 'We have to be realistic about the time frame," said Boudewijn Siemons, the chief executive of the Port of Rotterdam Authority. 'A couple of years ago, there was no steel in the ground, and there is now." Progress is being slowed by Europe's high electricity prices, which increase the cost of producing green hydrogen, and regulatory uncertainty. The European Union has set mandates that will require the use of green hydrogen in refining and other sectors. But Tengler at BloombergNEF said they aren't nearly stringent enough to fulfill the bloc's target of consuming 20 million tons of green hydrogen a year by 2030. Some hydrogen applications are losing to other fossil-fuel alternatives. Hydrogen buses have been left behind by electric vehicles. Other applications, such as hydrogen-based steelmaking and shipping fuel, are moving forward, but slowly. 'If it was easy it would be done a long time ago," Menezes said. Menezes pulled out of a plan to produce hydrogen-based jet fuel in Paramount, Calif., and a proposed green-hydrogen plant in Massena, N.Y. The company wrote off $2.9 billion for those projects and other cost cutting. In Louisiana, Air Products is trying to limit its exposure. Its risky strategy was criticized by activist investors who began calling for a change of course last year. The company is now seeking buyers for the ammonia-production and carbon-sequestration parts of the project, which could reduce its share of the cost by as much as $3 billion, Menezes said. Work won't continue until customers are found. Van Dalen, the environmental lawyer, would be pleased if Air Products' vision for the bayou crumbles. The hydrogen-production site is near a school, and the 40-mile carbon-dioxide pipeline would pass through rare wetland occupied by ospreys, largemouth bass and migratory birds. At Lake Maurepas, the plan to sequester carbon dioxide troubles some nature lovers and crabbers. Air Products says it consulted with government agencies on its project and is funding environmental-monitoring efforts. While Menezes looks for customers, Ghasemi's legacy in Louisiana can be seen in projects funded through Air Products' $1 million-a-year plan to secure communities' support, such as $200,000 for Lake Maurepas field trips and $50,000 for neutering feral cats.
Economic Times
2 hours ago
- Economic Times
Amid sky-rocketing prices, can you get affordable homes under $300K in US cities? Check details
Looking for homes under $300K in US? Live Events Most affordable US cities to buy a home for $300k or less (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel Despite home prices continuing to outpace the budgets of many Americans, there are still major US cities where the average price is under $300,000. According to research, there are more than 140 locations across the US where the median listing price sits at $300,000 or less, including several major metros that offer affordability and modern metropolitan amenities.'The majority of these cities are in the South or Midwest,' explains Hannah Jones, senior economic research analyst at "These regions tend to offer more affordable homes as they have generally more space to grow and lower demand than a high-density city (such as New York or Boston)."While most U.S. homebuyers are grappling with steep prices and historically high mortgage rates, recent data from reveals that there are still areas across the country where homes are available for under $300, the COVID-19 pandemic, the median price of a typical U.S. home was below $300,000. Today, that figure has soared. According to the latest data from Redfin, the median home price in April was $437,864—an increase of 1.3% compared to the same time last surge in prices, driven by a pandemic-fueled buying spree and a long-standing housing shortage, has made homeownership increasingly out of reach—especially for first-time buyers. High mortgage rates have only added to the National Association of Realtors (NAR) estimates that to close the current affordability gap, the U.S. housing market needs:367,000 more listings priced at or below $170,000,416,000 more under $255,000, and364,000 more priced below $340, numbers underscore the urgent need for more affordable housing options to the company's report, the most affordable cities in the U.S. are largely located in the Midwest and the South. Among the 145 cities surveyed where the average home price is $300,000 or less are several major urban centers, including Detroit, St. Louis, Memphis, Baltimore, Indianapolis, and the biggest cities with the most affordable home prices are:Detroit, MI ($109,000)Birmingham, AL ($181,500)St. Louis, MO ($199,999)Memphis, TN ($218,200)Baltimore, MD ($249,900)Lubbock, TX ($249,975)Indianapolis, IN ($268,500)Pittsburgh, PA ($274,900)Decatur, GA ($279,000)Kansas City, MO ($281,250)Oklahoma City, OK ($285,855)Louisville, KY ($289,900)Tulsa, OK ($289,900)Baton Rouge, LA ($289,945)Philadelphia, PA ($289,999)El Paso, TX ($295,000)Columbus, OH ($295,900)Clearwater, FL ($299,250)Jacksonville, FL ($299,900)Myrtle Beach, SC ($299,900)Ocala, FL ($299,999)San Antonio, TX ($300,000)Some cities saw a sharp rise in home values during the pandemic. And while prices in these areas may still be lower than those in the country's most expensive metro regions, they can remain out of reach for local reports that a typical monthly payment on a Detroit home—priced at the city's median list of $109,000—would be about $762 for a 30-year fixed mortgage at a 6.8% interest rate. This estimate includes taxes, insurance, and interest, assuming a 20% down payment of $21, housing options are still hard to come by along the East Coast, especially in the Northeast where shortages persist. However, buyers may still find homes priced under $300,000 in cities like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and the pandemic, home values surged in several cities. Although prices in these areas may still trail those in the nation's most expensive metro markets, they often remain unaffordable for many local to the median listing price for a home in Detroit is $109,000. Based on a 30-year fixed mortgage at a 6.8% interest rate—and assuming a 20% down payment of $21,800—the typical monthly cost, including taxes, insurance, and interest, comes to about $ affordable housing continues to be challenging along the East Coast, particularly in the Northeast, where inventory remains tight. Still, buyers may uncover properties under $300,000 in cities such as Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore.
